Gamers (Including myself) on a lot of pc forums seem to be realizing lately that pc's are not getting the high end games like years ago. Witcher 2 being an exception, there are not many games being made that even to TRY stressing our systems. Wouldn't it make sense that hardware developers would help fund products that cause customers to buy their hardware? I seem to be confused, why bother buying new hardware or even develop it if no games even use it? I think it would make more sense to have flagship games with new series of cards that are designed around the new technology. It makes no sense to use new hardware to run games that are designed on hardware from 2006.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Why do Nvidia and AMD not fund games?
- Thread starter Krieger91
- Start date
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
The problem is that we are at the end (graphically) of the console generation, there isn't much reason for developers to go all-out with PC graphics when they will most likely be outsold by console sales. They worry more about those looking OK and most seemingly being ports back to PCs.
I'm sure that they do assist/sponsor somewhat with some games (remember when you boot up a game and you see the nvidia - the way it's meant to be played/ATI logo?)
I'm sure that they do assist/sponsor somewhat with some games (remember when you boot up a game and you see the nvidia - the way it's meant to be played/ATI logo?)
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
Crysis2 is more of a port from 360 than it is a high-end game, it isn't as demanding as the first game was on current systems of the time. Starcraft2 is a DX9 game, and isn't that hard on a system except for a bit of CPU power on bigger fights. BFBC2 (3, huh?) is decently demanding, but not overly so.
The OP has a point, but there are exceptions to the rule (witcher2, metro2033, etc) but most midrange systems nowadays can play the game at native resolution and can turn up most settings (maybe not max AA/AF).
The OP has a point, but there are exceptions to the rule (witcher2, metro2033, etc) but most midrange systems nowadays can play the game at native resolution and can turn up most settings (maybe not max AA/AF).
crysis 1 was too extreme, it killed all the cards on the market at that time, who cares anyway, better for me 
, now i can get cheaper cards and enjoy high end games
hey maybe now i can make console owners shut up, because they keep bugging me how pc is expensive
edit: starcraft 2 makes my Q6600 @ 3.44 look like its a pentium 4 during big battles when reflection is on lol
, now i can get cheaper cards and enjoy high end games hey maybe now i can make console owners shut up, because they keep bugging me how pc is expensive
edit: starcraft 2 makes my Q6600 @ 3.44 look like its a pentium 4 during big battles when reflection is on lol
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Location
- New York, NY
Because making games accessible is more important to meet the bottom line than say make Crysis for the top 1%. Blizzard has a fairly decent model when it comes to this department: gameplay > graphics. Accessibility will be the downfall of unique gameplay I'm afraid.
thats what i said earlier?
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Location
- New York, NY
I see what you did there. BF3 = flying planes on large maps. BFBC2 = flying helicopters in circles, very tight circles.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Location
- New York, NY
Are you the OP?
whats an op? i just said that because u agreed with bf3 as me, Janus67 said bf2/3 is decently demanding
OP = Original Post.
But to answer the OP, and remind others, what about "The Way Its Meant To Be Played" and w/e AMD's version of that is. I recall people, especially from the AMD side, getting all bitter about, '...No wonder why it plays so slow on AMD b/c its a TWIMTBP game...'. So they are sponsering games and plenty of them.
Some of the issue about IQ in games are the fact that sadly a lot of them are console ports.
But to answer the OP, and remind others, what about "The Way Its Meant To Be Played" and w/e AMD's version of that is. I recall people, especially from the AMD side, getting all bitter about, '...No wonder why it plays so slow on AMD b/c its a TWIMTBP game...'. So they are sponsering games and plenty of them.
Some of the issue about IQ in games are the fact that sadly a lot of them are console ports.
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
Well you did say BFBC3 which people would take that you meant Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (and typed 3 on accident) instead of your meaning Battlefield 3 (the game that will be out this fall).
OP = Original Poster (the person that made the thread).
OP = Original Poster (the person that made the thread).
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
They do. I've run into a decent number of games with Nvidia or AMD/ATI plastered on the intro credits.
The issue is that the console market is rather larger than the PC market, and it's far harder to pirate console games. Hence, there is a lot more money in consoles than in PCs.
The issue is that the console market is rather larger than the PC market, and it's far harder to pirate console games. Hence, there is a lot more money in consoles than in PCs.
